245 Comments
User's avatar
Martha S. Brown's avatar

The Dems would be better off if they stuck to the messages in this speech and used them consistently rather than sending hysterical emails that basically say "Stop Trump, Send Money." She did a great job!

Expand full comment
It's Come To This's avatar

She did something in those 10 minutes those emails have never done — laid out a clear, easy-to-follow to-do list for us all to start in on.

And that to-do list didn’t involve wearing fuchsia pantsuits or holding up little paddles that made us think we were at an auction house, not the People’s House. To paraphrase so many others, I’m tired of watching Democrats bring popsicle sticks to a shiv fight.

Expand full comment
patricia's avatar

I think all dems should have walked out with rep Green

it would have been on the news whereas the paddle flashing was not

Expand full comment
patricia's avatar

will be a great sat nght liv skit though...

Expand full comment
Bernice M.'s avatar

100% agree.

Expand full comment
KHKate's avatar

Good trouble.

Expand full comment
D. Tubb's avatar

Yeah? Well why didn't you run for office bub? You could have showed us all how it's done. have you volunteered for any campaign? Participated in any protest? Did any phone work for your rep? Have you bothered to ask the women in the fuchsia pantsuits with the paddles how you can help save our democracy? What exactly have you done besides complain about the people who are actually in the trenches doing the work and unlike Harris, they actually won their elections and did so on a dime and drove their own cars to do it, there was no Air Force Two to cart their butts around, they had to get there on their own.These women that you so glibly make fun of and mock show up every damn day to serve people like you, the ones who are the first to criticise but the last to volunteer. You and some others would rather bitch and bitch and bitch because that is so much easier than actually doing something.They have more knowledge in their little finger about how this government functions than you will ever know so show them some respect because you could not accomplish what those women in the fuchsia pantsuits have accomplished, I know it and you know it.

Expand full comment
Ishmael's avatar

Gee, that is helpful. Notwithstanding all of that, Trump got a majority of the vote and tons of people stayed home. So perhaps it does make sense to consider a different approach.

Expand full comment
Swbv's avatar
Mar 7Edited

Actually, he got a plurality, not a majority. When he boasts of an historic mandate, he's exaggerating as usual.

https://www.cfr.org/article/2024-election-numbers

Expand full comment
Shannon Starks's avatar

This is why the dems in Congress are leaving it to us. Strategic protests. But we need good legal advice to do it successfully.

Expand full comment
hbaeuerle's avatar

Are you replying to someone?

Expand full comment
bitchybitchybitchy's avatar

Thank you. Keyboard warriors need to step back ans THINK.

Expand full comment
Lois W. Halbert's avatar

Exactly. It was embarrassing. Paddles were childlike. They should have all walked out with Greene. That would have put Trump in an uneasy position. It would have hurt his ego. It would have disarmed him.

Expand full comment
It's Come To This's avatar

The worst part about it was that it was all so piecemeal. Once Greene left, they could have all walked out after him, draping a Ukrainian flag over their seats to drive home the obvious -- the Dumb Dicktater was bloviating in an echo chamber filled only with his trained seals who clap and bark on command.

Whatever needed to have happened, it should have been organized and collective, not scattershot, piddly or small. That's what it all felt like to me at least.

Expand full comment
Wayne Shaw's avatar

Agreed. Haven't ceased signing petitions, but I refuse to give one penny to the follow up hysteria that always follows. And I'm as adamant about impeaching Trump now, as anyone. It's a fine line, and she seems to have walked it well.

Expand full comment
lauriemcf's avatar

Or doing pathetic performances like Schumer raising his arms in the air while chanting "We Will Win" I mean, sheesh.

Expand full comment
EUWDTB's avatar

Really? You think that we will only defeat fascism the day our most savvy and experienced leaders become perfect actors making "great TV"?

THIS is the problem with part of the left in this country, IMHO. Political literacy among ordinary citizens is low and we so often do not get our priorities right...

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

Americans, in general, are politically and intellectually lazy. Even Democrats want fast easy solutions. Democracy is messy and hard work. I hope we can teach this to a significant number of tRump voters before it is too late.

Expand full comment
TheGoldenMean's avatar

You cannot change people, they must change "themselves". MAGA base cannot be intellectually reasoned with. Once DT is gone the bottom will fall out. Let's make that happen sooner than later! All we can do is hope to encourage independents to stand on this side of the line.

Expand full comment
Shannon Starks's avatar

That's only the FIRST step, but it's a BIG one. What's a successful strategy for removing him from office? Lawyers, thinkers, anyone? I think strategy is our only hope for averting a worldwide disaster.

Expand full comment
TheGoldenMean's avatar

Dementia and old age....

Expand full comment
EUWDTB's avatar

Exactly. And we need to teach it to Democratic voters too, I'm afraid.

Expand full comment
Karen Burke Morison's avatar

Humans are naturally lazy. I lived in Europe as a kid and went to the local school. There are plenty of lazy people everywhere. It’s our nature to choose the easiest path.

Expand full comment
Shannon Starks's avatar

I think that will never happen as long as people are doing OK without worrying about democracy. Maybe a decade of serious suffering will bring a significant people around. By that time we'll be like Nazi Germany or some other autocratic police state. The window of opportunity for averting that reality is closing fast.

Expand full comment
Ricardo Grinbank's avatar

Embarrassing to say the least.

Expand full comment
EUWDTB's avatar

Democrats vitally need money. That's just a fact. So I hope we'll get THAT message and stop complaining about it, especially now that big donors are withdrawing and THE most efficient way to fight back as politicians is through lawsuits, which are extremely expensive..

Expand full comment
Jim Reddick's avatar

If they want my money, they need to show me they're willing to do more than talk.

Expand full comment
EUWDTB's avatar

Counterproductive idea :-). A democracy can only work FOR the people if it is a system of governance BY the people. So ASK WHAT YOU CAN DO FOR YOUR COUNTRY. In this case: GOOGLE what they are doing, instead of falsely imagining that they are merely talking. Fact-check cynical beliefs like this while we still can. You'll see, as soon as you do, they are doing a LOT. And as Harris explained during the campaign, they were actually already employing an army of lawyers so that they could file lawsuits (THE most effective way to stop the transformation of a democracy into a fascist regime) on day one - since fortunately, the GOP put their entire roadmap into writing; it's called Project 2025. And Democrats already achieved huge wins in courts for "we the people". Time to thank them and join them, if we want to survive THE most perilous period in the history of the US.

Expand full comment
Terri Buckner's avatar

I don't disagree with you about the need to financially support lawsuits, but this battle/war/whatever it is won't be won in the courts alone. We need to change hearts and minds of those who have shifted their allegiance from the Dems to Trump. That requires a strong, clear message and credible delivery of the message. Those who are disagreeing with you about the fundraising are simply asking for that strong, clear message and credible delivery (as we got from Slotkin) as proof of change before they invest.

Expand full comment
EUWDTB's avatar

I think it's counterproductive. First of all, the GOP now has THE wealthiest man on Earth bankrolling their campaigns. That means that they'll buy tons of ads to get neofascists installed in the 100,000 seats open for election this year alone already. We HAVE to match this with small, recurring donations. As long as Democrats don't have a supermajority in Congress, Pelosi's campaign finance reform bill won't be signed into law, and money will remain absolutely vital. And the only thing that fully justifies our donations is the fact that ALL Democrats are democrats. Democracy is at stake, so no matter how imperfect, all strategies tried out by Democrats now vitally and urgently need our full financial support.

Aside from that, yes, in the end, the only solution in a democracy is to change people's hearts and minds. That is NOT the job of politicians. The main job of politicians is to GOVERN, so to be passionate about lawmaking and the nitty-gritty of coalition building in DC, and in such a way that they faithfully represent what "we the people" want, knowing that they can only do what WE gave them the legal power to do. For now, that's almost nothing in Congress (except for activating crucial delaying procedures, which they are massively doing right now) and is entirely focused on lawsuits.

Changing hearts and minds is (and will always be) something WE THE PEOPLE can and have to do. Only we can talk with neighbors, friends, family members, colleagues etc. Only we can truly inform ourselves about what is going on and who is doing what in DC, fact-check our info, and then help others see what is objectively true.

One of THE most corrosive aspects of American democracy these last few decades (tyranny never happens overnight) is the idea that politicians should be good at "messaging". Corporate media entirely took over the media landscape, so they want controversial and shocking soundbites, and that's it. A democracy can only thrive when we all have REAL, respectful debates about utterly complicated issues that you cannot possibly pack into slogans and soundbites. So when it comes to "messaging" in the short attention span era, democrats (liberals and conservatives) will always lose the media battle. What we urgently need to restore are real debates among citizens, including politicians, historians, and intellectuals. And it's precisely because conservatives cannot win in such debates that already in 1976, Irving Kristol, founder of neoconservatism, wrote an op-ed in the WSJ called "The Stupid Party" and arguing that conservatives will only be able to win elections if they can play on people's "gut feeling" and if intellectuals stay "at the margins of society" and are kept out of public debates.

No politician or political message can restore the fabric of civil society that has gradually disappeared in the US. But WE can. Including here on Substack.

Expand full comment
Terri Buckner's avatar

The Democratic Party (ActBlue) needs to lead. That doesn't mean that politicians need to be the leaders but the 2-party reality we live in does require the "party" to lead. The first and primary principle behind effective change management is clear and consistent messaging--whether it is delivered by elected officials (who are seen as leaders) or by those of us who believe in the message.

I am not a Democrat through affiliation--they lost me years ago. But I do share the values of the Democratic party I grew up with. Trump has upended everything to do with those values. And he has effectively convinced millions of conservative Dems that his faux-populism is going to save them from the (as he paints it) money-grubbing liberals. Money and the courts are not going to change that and if you spend any time reading what the MAGA followers say, throwing more money (alone) at the problem is simply entrenching them more deeply in his version of reality.

There's no reason why the messaging and a low-key fundraising approach cannot happen concurrently.

Expand full comment
TheGoldenMean's avatar

It's not just the message, it's the messenger. Clear effective delivery (Think Trudeau) is paramount. Too much "mushy" diatribe is ineffective.

Expand full comment
EUWDTB's avatar

Imho it's neither the message nor the messaging. Harris had speeches that were at least as good as what Trudeau just pulled off. These are moments of "great TV", but they cannot possibly replace what a democracy vitally needs: real, respectful, in-depth public debates, in the media and among citizens at kitchen tables and during lunches at work. Speeches are great to make us feel fired up, or to summarize an argument and truth about ONE issue that is extremely simple (such as: tariffs are bad for everyone). But in order to build a strong, thriving democracy, we need debates. And REAL debates, in which the package (how the messenger looks, what words he uses etc) is so much less important than the content (depth of arguments, objective evidence, time to think and compare arguments, learn new facts etc.)/

Expand full comment
GaryE's avatar

💯… dealing with this magnitude of chaos requires coordination. They, the Dems may have been slow in getting out the blocks but, they are finding their stride. We don’t control the White House, Senate or House. Which means we don’t have power. However, we are not powerless. The PEOPLE have the power to do what we are doing. Protesting and calling their representatives even if you live in a red state. We’re just getting started.

Expand full comment
littlebird787's avatar

What exactly do they need to do to please you — be specific. Because if you are talking about lawsuits, there are a huge number of them. Democracy is not a spectator sport. I would add to that wise quote, it isn’t the quarterback who usually runs the ball into the end zone. It takes a team to win. So, be specific about what YOU are willing to do.

Expand full comment
Pam Birkenfeld's avatar

Except what’s the alternative to be them?

Expand full comment
Gerhard Fischer's avatar

I am not so sure that I agree. Dems seem to be flush with money. And let us not forget that they serve the same rich overlords as Republicans. That is part of the problem, and that is why we are not seeing a strong unified Dem response.

Expand full comment
EUWDTB's avatar

They're not, actually. They were, throughout the summer, but the NYT and other news outlets showed that big donors are leaving the party (for obvious reasons: they need to invest in MAGA now, since donors mostly donate based on personal interests, not ideology or preserving democracy...). And MAGA now has THE wealthiest man on Earth bankrolling their campaigns, so the only way to preserve democracy, now more than ever before, is to match their finances but through small donations.

Apart from that, I actually see a VERY strong and united Dem response, so what do you mean when you say you're not seeing it?

Finally, Democrats will continue to need billions in campaign donations until the day that "we the people" give them a supermajority in Congress and the WH, so that they can pass the Citizens United campaign reform bill that Pelosi already passed in the House. In the meantime, quite some wealthy Dem donors actually do support paying more taxes, having a strong social safety net etc., so not all millionaires/billionaires are necessarily villains...

Expand full comment
Charlotte Anne's avatar

100%

Expand full comment
Dolores Marshall's avatar

I have donated what I can afford as a social security retired nurse

Expand full comment
Gerhard Fischer's avatar

I agree. I angrily delete those “send money” emails. We lost the election not because we were outspent by MAGA. Many of us feel that Dems are in complete disarray right now. Sending them money will not change that.

Expand full comment
Patrick G. O’Donnell, M.D.'s avatar

As one or more comment-writer here has observed, real democracy takes time and hard work to achieve, sustain, or revive. I’m weary of the “sky-is-falling” message implicit in many Democratic Groups’ or Candidates’ text requests for money BUT—for ANY of them to Succeed—they Will Need Money.

We should beware of “all-or-nothing” mindsets that say No to every request, or even those that would say Yes to every Text. Rather, we should mindfully choose a few Groups or Candidates to whom we will commit monthly amounts that we Can afford, Complete the surveys that allow us some Input on what their priorities will be, AND keep Volunteering our Time, Talents, or Intelligence to keep up a Daily Resistance to Trump’s and MAGA’s assault on Democracy and the Rule of Law.

Expand full comment
Richard S's avatar

The problem with the flood of texts and emails is the repetitive asking for money while offering no clue as to how it will be spent. No hint of a plan. No hint of an agenda. No hint of a strategy.

It's simply, "Trump and/or the Republicans are dreadful. Please send money."

My reply is now one of two words: 'STOP' or 'Unsubscribe.'

We are in desperate need of a leader.

Expand full comment
Linda's avatar

Exactly! Until I see a united and reasonable response from the Dems I simply cannot keep sending them money. Us normal citizens are doing more at this point than the Democratic party. I donate to individual candidates who I feel may make a difference. Hand wringing is not the way to handle this monstrosity of a "government".

Expand full comment
Janet Gillis's avatar

I totally agree about Dem emails asking for money. A big turnoff for me. Is the Democratic Party really that broke?

Expand full comment
acameron salon's avatar

I have to agree! I know this may sound self defeating but, Show me (a plan) to take on the republicans and I'll donate. I don't take kindly to being fleeced.

Expand full comment
Shannon Starks's avatar

There are too few like her in Congress, so the people must rise to the occasion. We need strategic protest guidance to be effective. The "strategy" of BLM protests from COVID days won't work because Trump will call out the army. The Rosa Parks bus event was strategically planned. Where are the specialized lawyers who can work out a good plan for now?

Expand full comment
Ricardo Grinbank's avatar

Absolutely right Martha. Where were you hiding when we needed you?

Expand full comment
Dock Hooks's avatar

So true! Plus, Elissa speaks in terms of ordinary Americans rather than continuing in non-compromising uber-partisan terms of division. Not that I think our present perfidious potus and/or his sycophantic soldiers of sedition deserve a seat at any table, but that there are likely those who are other than Republicans-in-name-only aka Trumpstafarian sorts who are perhaps keeping their heads down concerned for their families and selves safety during these rather dark scary and certainly existentially precarious times.

Expand full comment
Julie Bannerman's avatar

Amen!!! The hysterical texts and emails with a Donate button say “we Dems haven’t learned anything” and are tone deaf for this moment in history.

Expand full comment
Anne Wilson's avatar

Can we clone her?

Expand full comment
Barbara Mullen's avatar

It is way past time for the older Democratic Party Leaders to step aside. Give Crockett, AOC, Slotkin and others the reins. Schiff and Jeffries are ineffective.

Expand full comment
Sandi's avatar

I thought she did a wonderful job. And I agree with you--it is time for the older leaders to step aside & let the leaders of the future shine. As an aside, I am one of the olders!

Expand full comment
Barbara Mullen's avatar

Me too! I am 75.

Expand full comment
Eleanor Duffield's avatar

Connelly could have done that with AOC, mentoring her and tending to his cancer. But NO! power speaks.

Expand full comment
Jim Carmichael's avatar

Slotkin’s key phrase was “moral clarity.” Therein lies the key to our current chaos, because it is totally lacking in this administration.

Expand full comment
KATE RINDY's avatar

Thank you. Elissa Slotkin represents so many of us. May her voice be heard.

Expand full comment
Patric Martin's avatar

Right on. The future of the party.

Expand full comment
Mary Ann Yaeger's avatar

Everything about Elissa Slotkin's speech and persona was fantastic, just what was needed. I think we will be seeing a lot more of this young lady.

Expand full comment
Pam W's avatar

It is more relevant that she is a senator than a young lady.

Expand full comment
Alan Greenstein's avatar

" She reminded us that, for all of Trump’s talk, he still hasn’t sent a bill that would fix the immigration system"

Two things. First. Trump is lazy. Going through the process to get an actual law passed is too much of a bother. He prefers to rule by EO, but EO is not law. Second: He does not accept that there are three co-equal branches of the federal government.

Expand full comment
Steve 218's avatar

This last is hardly surprising. In spite of 4 previous years in the Office of the President. he still has no idea how government actually works, and resists learning. It will ultimately be his undoing, assuming we can hold it together long enough for that to happen.

Expand full comment
Karen Burke Morison's avatar

Totally agree, Steve 218. Most people, in and out of government, have little knowledge of everything the feds do and how it works. I made a consulting career out of studying and learning that, and I spent a lot of time briefing various federal offices about what others in their own Department and elsewhere were doing! I wrote two manuals describing 300 federal grant programs affecting children and youth, and the biggest buyers were federal offices with career staff (as opposed to political appointees). I’m never surprised at how little even political appointees know about their own departments. Still disgusted, but not surprised.

Expand full comment
Steve 218's avatar

You certainly did your part and provided a valuable wealth of information for people. It surely helped them to do their jobs.

Expand full comment
Delia Wozniak's avatar

EO is the law, unfortunately until courts decide otherwise!

Expand full comment
FVera's avatar

Please don’t forget Bernie Sanders’ speech. In my opinion it contained more passion and specific points without bringing up the name of Reagan, a terrible president, to do it. Slotkin was good, but not as good as Bernie. Passion is contagious.

Expand full comment
Steve 218's avatar

There is little question that both Senators Slotkin and Sanders made good points to support our democratic principles.

Expand full comment
nmgirl's avatar

We need a new caucus. Just like they have the tea party disrupters like MTG and Bobo, we need our true liberal caucus. AOC, Slotkin, Raskin, Stansbury, etc. The ones that will stand up for our democracy.

Expand full comment
Karen Burke Morison's avatar

That’s exactly what Republicans are hoping Dems will do. If you want them to stay in power for the rest of this century, then do that.

Expand full comment
Steve 218's avatar

How do you figure? A vocal caucus that the Democratic House Representatives can get behind wouldn't hurt. The names mentioned are a fair balance of supporters of democratic values.

Expand full comment
acameron salon's avatar

Any voice that constantly reiterates the basic facts that, Trump, is a 34 time convicted felon, a convicted sexual preditor, a seditionist and a PUTIN LOYALISTis a GREAT place to start. Trump is not fit to be POTUS, legaly, morally, ethically, in any way shape or form. HE BELONGS IN PRISON. IMPEACH, IMPEACH, IMPEACH, BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE!!! The midterms are coming and rest asured, Trump will do whatever to prevent his IMPEACHMENT.

Expand full comment
Wayne Shaw's avatar

It could go either way. It's risky, but sometimes we have to take those risks, in the sociopolitical arena, and in life. I don't discount Karen Morison's warning, but I lean more toward your point.

Expand full comment
Steve 218's avatar

You said it - it IS risky, but is it a greater risk to continue doing things the way it's been done in the past and expect different results? Isn't that the definition of something unsavory let alone unproductive?

Expand full comment
Julie Bannerman's avatar

Agree - his passionate rundown of how the GOP is harming 95 percent of Americans is the clear voice of truth to power this moment needs.

Expand full comment
Karen Burke Morison's avatar

Bernie has become entertainment, no longer serious. He is just asking to be mocked. He makes more laughs than scores policy points. And he makes Democrats look very out of touch. I always focus first on policy, but I’m a wonk. Sometimes getting a good messenger out front actually is important.

Expand full comment
Joan Levine's avatar

Now is time for Dems to take all the $$$ they ask for and get this rebuttal on PRIME time Should not only be read hear. Trump made sure to go on so long to reduce audience for sound rebuttal

Expand full comment
Cynthia Sabin's avatar

Slotkin for America 2028

Expand full comment
Lynne DeLucia's avatar

Excellent summary of Slotkin’s speech. Too bad few saw the speech live. It received little attention from mainstream media. Thanks, Contrarian!

Expand full comment
Jean Lopez's avatar

Brava, Elissa Slotkin! Cheers to The Contrarian. You are our lifeline to truth, our inspiration for perseverance, our nutrition for action. Thank you.

Expand full comment
John Ryan(PA)'s avatar

Trump put the World to sleep with his endless rambling and significant errors, then the intelligence in the room get's a chance, after most of us fell asleep or turned it off. Thanks, Senator Slotkin. Your service and intelligence is noted. I think your resume is more substantial then Trumps entire cabinet put together.

Expand full comment
Eva Douglas's avatar

I am not in her district. After hearing her speek, I wish I was.

Expand full comment
Mary Ellen Fritsch's avatar

All of Michigan is her district. She was elected Senator this year.

Expand full comment
PMC's avatar

I agree. I support Elissa Slotkin

Expand full comment
Wayne Shaw's avatar

Originally from Michigan, and Michigan has always been a swing state (or a "battleground state"). As responses go, this sounds first rate.

Expand full comment
lauriemcf's avatar

Born and raised in Michigan, I felt very proud that she was a Michigander!

Expand full comment